Oregon becomes the first state to decriminalize hard drugs like cocaine and heroin

Now many "users", like Millennials will be flocking to Oregon. Just like they did, and are still doing, to Colorado that legalized recreational pot. However, since we've returned to Colorado, we've not smelled any or seen any sold. Of course we don't live in a big city, like Ft. Collins, Denver or Colorado Springs.
 

I think that the word decriminalize is misleading. It makes posession more like a traffic ticket with a $100 fine and required attendance in an addiction recovery program.

So to me it means that people processing small amounts of these drugs will not have to go through the court system. This will save the state money in both the court system and the jail system. It also forces them into a program that may help them deal with their addiction or drug use.

It's not as if they are let off without their drugs being confiscated, it just means they won't have to go to court unless they want to fight the charges or to jail.

Here's that text from the article:

The Oregon drug initiative will allow people arrested with small amounts of hard drugs to avoid going to trial, and possible jail time, by paying a $100 fine and attending an addiction recovery program. The treatment centers will be funded by revenues from legalized marijuana, which was approved in Oregon several years ago.
 
raybar said:
Since so-called "war on drugs" has been so spectacularly unsuccessful, perhaps it's time to try another approach.
Click to expand...

That is what I have been thinking for a few years now. I mean if the drug heads want it ? ... Let them have it. Cut the street price / profit, maybe cut some of the related crime?

If it kills them? I really don't care. Keeps the funeral business going........... (y)
 
asp3 said:
I think that the word decriminalize is misleading. It makes posession more like a traffic ticket with a $100 fine and required attendance in an addiction recovery program.
Click to expand...
No matter how you slice it, it's a step down
It's a statement on today's society

Looks like Portland will even beat out Amsterdam

Glad I live in southern Oregon, where plain folks just wanna work for an honest living
 
Gary O' said:
No matter how you slice it, it's a step down
It's a statement on today's society

Looks like Portland will even beat out Amsterdam

Glad I live in southern Oregon, where plain folks just wanna work for an honest living
Click to expand...

We disagree, I see it as a step up and addressing the problem of addiction as opposed to making people suffer for their bad choices.

I found Amsterdam to be a delightful place myself.

So are you saying that people who want to do drugs don't want to work for an honest living?
 
This is old news. The reason the state uses the word "decriminalize" instead of "legalize" is because by Federal law no state can make laws that supersede Federal laws. This can be found in the Supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article VI Clause 2. (I had to look up the Article and clause numbers, in case someone wishes to fact check me.

The reason that I knew this was because I have read several cases where people from states that allow MJ to be smoked, used or whatever, have been caught with it in states that do not allow it and PA is one (for now). The owner of the MJ that I caught on an Interstate after a traffic stop for speeding and going off the side of the highway was, "Well, it's legal in my state, so I am allowed to carry it and use it.
 
Has anyone who wanted, or was desperate enough, to use those addictive drugs, ever been stopped by making their use a criminal offense? Has it worked any better than Prohibition did a century ago? Did people stop drinking?

Criminalizing this kind of stuff absolutely never works. It just drives it underground.

However, it might be true that Oregon will now see an influx of users. If I lived there, I wouldn't be too thrilled about that.
 
Sunny said:
Has anyone who wanted, or was desperate enough, to use those addictive drugs, ever been stopped by making their use a criminal offense? Has it worked any better than Prohibition did a century ago? Did people stop drinking?

Criminalizing this kind of stuff absolutely never works. It just drives it underground.

However, it might be true that Oregon will now see an influx of users. If I lived there, I wouldn't be too thrilled about that.
Click to expand...
But as other states follow suit, an they will, albeit slowly, it'll all level off. I'm sure that most of us weren't around during Prohibition but wasn't it the same thing, based around alcohol? Illegal drinking establishments, gangs and killings flourished the same as today's dug users/sellers in some locations.

All mind altering drugs should be treated in the same manner, whether liquid, powder or whatever.
 
Last edited:
Manatee said:
Some politicians haven't got a lick of sense.
Click to expand...
Which way are you directing that, to the ones moving forward or the ones staying with the model that isn't working?

In either case this was a voter approved measure so it wasn't just politicians it was the electorate of Oregon. It might have been written by members of the legislature (I don't care enough to find out) but it's the voters who approved it.
 
asp3 said:
We disagree, I see it as a step up and addressing the problem of addiction as opposed to making people suffer for their bad choices.

I found Amsterdam to be a delightful place myself.

So are you saying that people who want to do drugs don't want to work for an honest living?
Click to expand...

I've never know anyone that ' wanted to do drugs'
I've know many that -drugs devoured, leaving them a husk.
You do not tinker with something you cannot control.
Some can take alcohol or leave it alone; drugs are a different kettle of fish.

Yes, we need a national plan to deal with addiction, not what is proposed in Oregon.
 
911 said:
This is old news. The reason the state uses the word "decriminalize" instead of "legalize" is because by Federal law no state can make laws that supersede Federal laws. This can be found in the Supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article VI Clause 2. (I had to look up the Article and clause numbers, in case someone wishes to fact check me.

The reason that I knew this was because I have read several cases where people from states that allow MJ to be smoked, used or whatever, have been caught with it in states that do not allow it and PA is one (for now). The owner of the MJ that I caught on an Interstate after a traffic stop for speeding and going off the side of the highway was, "Well, it's legal in my state, so I am allowed to carry it and use it.
Click to expand...

Boy, 911, people can/do give the craziest excuses for doing/having something illegal, don't they? I'm sure you have even more stories than this one.
 
The cost index for Oregon housing is horrendous (either rentals or outright purchases), so I don't think we'll see a large influx of people here. There may be a few transients passing through but to get any type of housing along the Pacific coast is a budget stopper. Nevada, Idaho or Montana may be their final resting place, so to speak. Then property taxes kick in you get a double whammy just to have a warm place to sleep.
Sunny said:
However, it might be true that Oregon will now see an influx of users. If I lived there, I wouldn't be too thrilled about that.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jerry old said:
I've never know anyone that ' wanted to do drugs'
I've know many that -drugs devoured, leaving them a husk.
You do not tinker with something you cannot control.
Some can take alcohol or leave it alone; drugs are a different kettle of fish.

Yes, we need a national plan to deal with addiction, not what is proposed in Oregon.
Click to expand...

I've known more than a few who enjoyed doing drugs. They know their limits and know how to control their use to avoid it interfering with their normal drug free days. I've also known some who are not able to control themselves well and aren't as sharp when working as they could be.

I do agree that some people shouldn't consider using drugs based on family addiction history. However not everyone who uses "hard drugs" is doomed to addiction and ruining their life.

I was not in Vietnam so I cannot comment on this personally, but I've read reports about heroin use by US soldiers in Vietnam and evidently it was more widespread than reported by mainstream media. According to the study below 34% of soldiers used heroin while in Vietnam, 20% showed signs of addiction there but only 1% of them were re-addictied after their return to the US even though 10% of them tried the drug here after returning. Here's that study https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/add.13584 .

People in South America (I think mainly Peru and Bolivia) use coca tea as a mild stimulant without addiction or dependence. I tried it while I was in Peru and would love to have it here as well, but since it comes from the raw materials that cocaine (which I've never tried) is made from it isn't available here.
 
A nationwide push to relax drug laws took a significant step forward Tuesday as voters made Oregon the first state to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of street drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. Meanwhile, five more states legalized marijuana for adults.

Yes folks and as we all know coke and heroin and meth users always buy in small amounts. Note these are street drugs not drugs regulated by he govt. Beating someone to death should also be legalized in Oregon as long as it was done in a caring and giving state of mind.
 
fmdog44 said:
A nationwide push to relax drug laws took a significant step forward Tuesday as voters made Oregon the first state to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of street drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine. Meanwhile, five more states legalized marijuana for adults.

Yes folks and as we all know coke and heroin and meth users always buy in small amounts. Note these are street drugs not drugs regulated by he govt. Beating someone to death should also be legalized in Oregon as long as it was done in a caring and giving state of mind.
Click to expand...

I always thought the population of Oregon and Washington State were decent, law-abiding people.
I'm sure the current influx of ''Freaks" is not representative of these two states. (Hopefully)
 
jerry old said:
I always thought the population of Oregon and Washington State were decent, law-abiding people.
I'm sure the current influx of ''Freaks" is not representative of these two states. (Hopefully)
Click to expand...

So you are saying that decent law abiding citizens cannot possibly agree with reducing the penalty for drug possession and requiring those who are caught with drugs to attend addiction recovery programs. Well then call me a indecent law abiding citizen.

Your hypothesis that there has been in influx of "freaks" (nothing condescending about that designation) that has reached the 50+ percentage of voters required to pass such a measure in Oregon seems pretty ridiculous.
 
Mood altering drug or alcohol has always been sought by all civilizations.
America has chosen to criminalize drug use-right
Those that seek a alternate reality have their reasons.
They are not criminals In the Beginning; however, there are few that can control their need for more drugs.
They cannot work, they have to feed their 'Monkey.'

To those few that can control their addiction contribute to the overall problem.
I've met ONE that could use drugs on a semi-regular basis; that was twenty years ago, I wonder if he became an addict.

Alcohol/drugs demean the person.
Jail, prison is not the answer.
Abstinence does not exist as a cultural norm
Drugs/Alcohol are a part of our culture and we have no workable concept on how to deal with it.
We deal with the aftermath: Vehicle wrecks, robberies, killings, children without anyone to support them...
Substance abuse issues fill court dockets and will continue to do so.
If you choose to be a part-time user-I hope you do fall into the abyss
 
asp3 said:
I think that the word decriminalize is misleading. It makes posession more like a traffic ticket with a $100 fine and required attendance in an addiction recovery program.

So to me it means that people processing small amounts of these drugs will not have to go through the court system. This will save the state money in both the court system and the jail system. ...
Click to expand...
Decriminalizing for small amounts to take a burden off the court system makes perfect sense. Then sentence dealers and pimps to the maximum.
 


Back
Top